Content Count

Joined

Last visited

Forums

Everything posted by Art-J

Discussing any other video game on ED forums is against their forum rule No. 1.15, so whether it's Il-2, Minecraft, Strip Poker or whatever, doesn't matter, posts will be removed or threads will be closed. Simple as that and I can understand the good ole "my house my rules" principle on their part, even though I don't always agree with it (and have been sitting behind the bars, temporarily banned for some months because of it :D).
Being booted for actions outside their forum, however, is a hamfisted move to put it mildly.
Back to the planes - I consider DCS to be an excellent cheap alternative for P3D and XP11, for guys like me, who got bored with combat sims and prefer non-combat piloting of highly interactive and detailed warbirds and early jets in VFR conditions. Lack of period-correct "background" content is a pity, but not a dealbreaker then. I have to admit though, I bought all my modules during various promo sales, some of the with -70% discount, so in the end for me - they were worth it. I wouldn't recomend paying the full price, though, at least not with the current state of Normandy map and WWII assets pack. Normandy is a lost cause - Ugra Media, which apparently created some good content for BoX franchise, dropped the ball completely on their DCS addon and don't seem to be bothered with supporting and improving it further in any way. Peculiar situation. Well, In that case I'm glad to read next two WWII maps are going to be ED-built. Whenever they come, and when more WWII content is available, the platform might become fully relevant WWII option, to complete BoX franchise on my PC rather than compete with it.

Keep in mind the guys behind the DCS I-16 started making that plane 5 years ago, and given the clusterF the BoS was under Loft's "command" back then, I would've probably perceived DCS as a platform with more promising future as well.
It's also important to remember they come from FSX/P3D modding scene, so the question of the plane "fitting" the rest or not was/is most likely the very last thing on their priority list.

Still playing heavily modded GPL every now and then - CanAm cars and '67 prototypes + period correct tracks are too fun to pass on them, also with a handful of exceptions, they're just not available in newer sims, sadly. Same for historic cars & tracks in Assetto Corsa.
In my case it's mostly about hotlapping leisurely, however (or lukewarmlapping I guess ), rather than "racing" per se.

DCS manuals are a mixed bag, they explain some systems in great detail, while being incomplete and confusing in description of others. The radiator info belongs in the latter category.
These are the posts in which FM-coder for DCS Dora explains how the flap control works in their sim:
https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2188375&postcount=31
https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2565748&postcount=69
I haven't flown BoX Dora much, but the system modelling seems to be similar (if not the same?). In either case, radiator knob is something you shouldn't bother touching at all in normal operations.

a) The hole is flush with the external fuselage skin, so without a ram intake (like the one for supercharger) there would be no wind blowing into the pit. Actually...
b) ... there might even be a bit of a suction created by lower static pressure caused by airflow outside, as neatly demonstrated on this infamous video:

They don't have to be, however, that's the point. There's an alternative workaround:
That's exactly how DCS tackles the same problem. For a compromise solution, it works quite well I'd say. I use tapping the Warthog spade grip for controlling the DCS Spit brakes, while analog toe brakes on my pedals do the job in the other warbirds.

DCS still uses its ancient, primitive, giant hitbox-based damage model, which, coupled with braindead AI operating on extremely simplified flight models (not much related to visual damage anyway) make the sim combat-ready only for jets in practical terms. I'd say forget about fighting in warbirds and use the sim as a cheap alternative of P3D/Xplane for now, at least in short VFR flights scenarios. This is where it shines and that's how I've been using it with great satisfaction (I admit I'm totally not a combat oriented guy, however).
Revised, scratch-built, detailed damage model, closer to CloD and BoX standards, is apparently in the internal testing phase nowadays. Arrival time unspecified. Haven't heard about similar AI overhauls being planned though.

In that posted link they write about cockpit being ready, also they showed some Work In Progress flight footage (from the cockpit) in one of the later development videos. So don't worry, it will be flyable.

Last week I was reading about one of 486. Sqn RNZAF pilots, Rick Tanner, ending his flying career after a landing mishap, when his Tempest flipped over because of parking brake being left engaged accidentally before touch down. I guess we'll have to wait for the Tempest and see If the same thing can happen in BoX ;). Not holding my breath, though, because the only three taildragger planes I fly in this sim (P-40, P-47, Spit IX) can touchdown with full brakes no problem. True, Thunderbolt has a bit of nose down tendency when doing so (easily controllable with elevator), but the remainig two don't even try to pretend they could flip.
What we can quantify and compare, however, are engine parameters and plane behaviour when doing ground checks in the Spit IX. Real P.N. says the prop and mag check were to be done at 0 PSI boost. Only takeoff power checks required the plane to be tied down. The document doesn't specify what RPM you got at 0 boost, but I'd presume with 4-bladed Rotol prop it wouldn't be much different to Mustangs, i.e. about 2300 RPM.
In BoX, trying to keep the plane stationary with full brakes at 0 PSI doesn't work - it will happpily start rolling. But OK, the plane pulls much higher RPM, thanks to questionable modelling of prop governors in this sim, maybe that's the reason. Let's try again by adjusting RPM then, 2300, corresponding to about -3 PSI of boost it seems. Nah, same result, the plane will start moving.
When the Mustang is out, we'll see if the same experiment can be done in that one (30" MAP, 2300 RPM).
I don't expect brake fade to be modelled. It's not present in DCS either, does it exist in AccuSim's offerings for P3D? No idea. But in BoX, the brakes seem to be lacking form the get go, even before they could start fading. Managable? Sure, just like any gamey/simplified aspects of this or any other sim. Accurate? I'd say not quite.

BtoB, how do you find CH quadrant in this sim anyway? Putting feathering aside, Is it possible to manage twins without the whole selecting/deselecting individual engines thing? Don't remember if all individual assignments are available in controls menu and can't check it at the moment.
I've been thinking about purchasing such a unit to deal with upcoming Lightning and DCS Mosquito (some extra levers would come in handy in Thunderbolt as well) but I'm not sure how compatible it is with BoX and CloD.

Nah, If it's "humming away", it's just windmilling (note, the difference in engine tone is there allright, it's just not well audible with the other one making full noise). Just tested the A-20 and indeed, mixture to cutoff kills the engine for good, no need to hit start/stop key, BUT, you do need to use feather command to see the prop being animated accordingly and stop.

Game installed on HDD or SSD? I used to suffer from stutters because of radio call-outs from AI wingmen. The uncompressed .ogg samples (if I recall correctly?) being read from my old HDD and processed by my Audigy and later Xonar sound card were alwasy causing stutters. It was quite a "popular" problem amongst many CloD players back in the day. Various solutions suggested back then didn't help.
Only moving to SSD solved the problem once and for all.

I use JDownloader for that - already have it installed for other purposes but capability of downloading videos from streaming sites is a nice bonus of this app.
Faster options might be possible - long ago I used to use a simple, custom plugin for old Opera browser, made specifically for downloading youtube vids, offering vid resolution choice as well. I don't do it anymore, but I'd hazard a guess similar plugins should be available for any other browser nowadays as well.

Differential braking while taxing is a must in any taildragger. Well, any taildragger, which doesn't have some sort of a tailwheel steering mechanism, and most planes in BoX don't have such device.
You can get away without diff brakes in some planes only because this sim has overoptimistic rudder effectiveness at low RPM and speeds. On the other hand, brakes in BoX are badly inefficient, but it's crucially important to have them mapped and use them anyway. Maybe the 190 is just a bit more handful in this aspect, I don't fly german birds all that often so can't spot much of a difference - counter braking and counter steering with rudder as soon as yaw stars to develop is a universal tip, which works and applies to all planes here.
As for the second issue, indeed, 190 doesn't have either aileron, elevator or rudder trims. It does have adjustable horizontal stab though, like in 109's, but electrical one. That's the only "trimming" in flight you get, otherwise have to deal with roll and yaw yourself. Maybe you haven't mapped the stab adjustment correctly (or at all) in game options? I don't remember how that function is called in controls screen, someone with access to the game will have to check and confirm.

One cannot use AI squad members as an Fw-190-value-indication however, as in this game they're idiots unable to utilize "energy" fighters to their full potiential. Anyone trying to play offline campaign in these is destined to end up being more or less frustrated, sooner or later.
Bad luck, I guess it must be difficult to program good AI for vertical and energy style combat. Though I'm still puzzled why veteran-level AI in 1992 "Aces of the Pacific" could actually do it well (AI in that game tought me what boom and zoom was), while none of the later flight sims pulled it off...

i'd hazard a guess Zach is talking about "multicrew" in a context of the first ever DCS implementation of an AI crew member capable of doing more things than only shooting door guns / adjusting autopilot (UH-1 / Mi-8) and doing them quite well it seems, judging from reviews. Not in the context of actual multiplayer functionality you're asking about (though I do not know if that one has been implemented in HB's F-14 or not).

Fang, mind you, with more complicated terrain mesh on this map, and much more forest coverage all around, it will always be more resource hungry than the others, requiring gfx settings compromises to be made, as pointed above. How much more hungry is debatable, but hardware requirements of other maps are just irrelevant in this case. By definition don't expect the performance of maps to be equal.

RPM is neither more nor less "automatic" than in any other plane in the sim with constant speed propeller , so one still has to be careful about limitations of such system and the plane is still less automated than German birds. Unless they implemented here the late-war option to manually interconnect RPM and throttle levers? Don't know, haven't flown it in this sim all that much, as with current FM the plane's a bit of a roflcopter, though pleasant one I admit.
Radiators should go back to auto after switching back from override, if they don't then that's another wonky thing about the way the plane's modelled.

Big thumbs up for the guy responsible for the "smoother grass rendering" part. I know it's one of the many small things BM referred to above, but it's been a pet peeve of mine for years. 4.54 was already an improvement in this regard, but the tweak in 4.55 is a bliss. Love it already, though haven't checked if it works on crop fields too.

The answer to 1) is simple - pretty much all of them, as by the 1930's internal supercharger (usually gear driven) became an ordinary component of every proper aero engine (by "proper" I mean anything bigger than small engines in little training and liason planes like Piper Cub or Po-2 - these remained naturally aspirated, because you don't need blown engine for similar tasks).

^ Because if everything's normal, planes with clockwise-turning propellers tend to want to turn left.
In this case, however, to me it sounds like you've got your controls or engine selection not sorted properly and you throttle up only your left engine instead of both of them.